So now that the Hellbeast has ended her campaign, do you think she might Budd Dwyer herself and save us all decades of pain and suffering from this point on?
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=860c9b9f3b&p=1
Wouldn't each of you agree this should be required for any candidate who spuriously subjects us to months of torment and then loses?
Totem
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Who will Best Awesomize the Debates?
Who will Best Awesomize the Debates?Follow
Totem wrote:
"can not say as there has been next to NOTHING of news coverage of McCAin(sp?) on TV or the radio or on the internet. although Oboma has had more then his fair share worth of coverage." -- Singdall
Wouldn't that make Oblackman's coverage more than his fair share? Typical liberal media bias.
Totem
Wouldn't that make Oblackman's coverage more than his fair share? Typical liberal media bias.
Totem
well the proof is in the broadcasting.
who have you heard about on the news for the last say 6 months? you have heard about McCain? nope, you have heard about Clinton and Obama, that is 90% of the political news coverage right there.
Samira wrote:
Never mind that there has been an actual story to cover rather than just marveling "Yep, Ol' McCain's still the nominee! Yep. Back to you, Rudy."
that we are made aware of thanks to the lack of news coverage. what happened to "fair representation" of the candidates? what happened to fair air time? i guess that only is true for Dems and for Dems to force upon Pubs when they are losing to said Pubs.
Do you ever remove that tinfoilhat?
Donate. One day it could be your family.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
I grant you McCain hasn't been getting a lot of headlines for a few weeks; but he's mentioned in practically every story covering either side.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Quote:
that we are made aware of thanks to the lack of news coverage. what happened to "fair representation" of the candidates? what happened to fair air time? i guess that only is true for Dems and for Dems to force upon Pubs when they are losing to said Pubs.
It has nothing due to the fact that there was a ongoing primary race for the democrats?
Nope, it's the liberal media up to it's old tricks.
Edited, Jun 4th 2008 3:50pm by Timelordwho
Just as Planned.
Didn't make it to the polls. Work and gas prices , you know.
Samira wrote:
"No, I'm calling you a f*cking jerk." --to fellow Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, when Grassley asked "Are you calling me stupid?"
Awesome
I have to say, I respect the old pensioner's forthrightedness and lack of ************ Now sure, some might interpret that as the start of senile degeneration, and it probably is, but it's entertaining and refreshing nonetheless. Out of all the Republican candidates, he's the one I liked the most.
Having said that, the last thing this planet needs is another entertaining yet war-mongering US President. Don't get me wrong, I loved the Bushisms, they brought me many hours of laughter, but it still quite didn't make up for all the wars and the killing and the fUcked-up barabaric policies.
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
Now sure, some might interpret that as the start of senile degeneration, and it probably is, but it's entertaining and refreshing nonetheless.
No, he's pretty much always been that way. And while it is endearing from a distance, I don't want him representing the US in any meaningful exchange on the world stage.
I wouldn't want him as a Cabinet member, much less President.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Samira wrote:
And while it is endearing from a distance, I don't want him representing the US in any meaningful exchange on the world stage.
Me neither of course. London is just not far enough from the US
Also, I'm pretty sure the only thing McCain could "Awesomize" is the net profit of coffin makers.
In the Middle-East, mostly.
Quote:
... and the outright cruelty toward a young woman is off-putting.
To be fair, he did Marry her, so he would know if she really is a **** or not.
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin
Samira wrote:
In 1960? Probably. And Nixon was shifty-eyed and sweaty, haha.
Did Nixon agree to televised debates in 1968? Does anyone know?
Did Nixon agree to televised debates in 1968? Does anyone know?
As for McCain, let me share a story. Once upon a time he descended upon the floor in a tizzy, red-faced and going on and on about some legislation that was a waste of the taxpayer's money, ill thought-out, etc etc.
He was a co-sponsor. What did he do? For years, he refused to co-sponsor a bill.
McCain doesn't think, is often not aware of what goes on around him, but has excellent staff. It's no wonder he favors military solutions over diplomatic ones, because the man has no finesse. Action's fine when it's called for, but I'd rather not have (another) President who is ignorant about his own policy, quick to fly off the handle, and bad at accepting responsibility for his actions.
Edited, Jun 4th 2008 7:29pm by Atomicflea
Samira wrote:
I grant you McCain hasn't been getting a lot of headlines for a few weeks; but he's mentioned in practically every story covering either side.
maybe were you are, but not here. in the last several months (4 - 6 months) 90% of the political coverage on local news channels has been clinton and obama. they might mention mccain 1 time per week and then only for about 10-15sec compared 5-10min on clinton and obama and those 2 get mentions several times throughout the hour/half hour news broadcast.
McCain had trouble reading from the teleprompter last night, and his meager audience was so unnatural, I assume that there were "Applause" and "Cheer" signs somewhere off camera.
On the other hand, Obama is black.
Lesser of two evils, I guess.
On the other hand, Obama is black.
Lesser of two evils, I guess.
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.
Timelordwho wrote:
Quote:
that we are made aware of thanks to the lack of news coverage. what happened to "fair representation" of the candidates? what happened to fair air time? i guess that only is true for Dems and for Dems to force upon Pubs when they are losing to said Pubs.
It has nothing due to the fact that there was a ongoing primary race for the democrats?
Nope, it's the liberal media up to it's old tricks.
Edited, Jun 4th 2008 3:50pm by Timelordwho
yes and the rules clearly state that ALL candidates get fair and EQUAL time of representation. hmmm ALL still means both sides does it not? or is that just ALL DEMOCRATS?
oh and for those who think they know who i am voting for you are wrong. i have not chosen my candidate of choice. ill make my mind up before the election and i will vote. right now i dont know enough about either of the big 2 to choose.
not enough news coverage for McCain and not enough real coverage for Obama.
not enough news coverage for McCain and not enough real coverage for Obama.
Singdall wrote:
yes and the rules clearly state that ALL candidates get fair and EQUAL time of representation.
Which rules are these? And does Ron Paul know about them? 'Cause he's still in the race.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
yes and the rules clearly state that ALL candidates get fair and EQUAL time of representation.
They changed that law. 50 years ago.
They changed that law. 50 years ago.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
McCain is the new James Stockdale.
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Commander Annabella wrote:
McCain is the new James Stockdale.
Atomicflea wrote:
Commander Annabella wrote:
McCain is the new James Stockdale.
I was just thinking Vietnam POW with an inability to speak in public. But point taken.
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Smasharoo wrote:
They changed that law. 50 years ago.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
So I don't have to watch nightly replays of the most uncomfortable smiling in the world?
Nah, just 100 stories on Fox about how he won WW2 single handedly with only a banana and a paper clip.
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Jophiel wrote:
Singdall wrote:
yes and the rules clearly state that ALL candidates get fair and EQUAL time of representation.
Which rules are these? And does Ron Paul know about them? 'Cause he's still in the race.
same rule that prevented several Law and Order TV shows from running due to the actor running for pres. it was "not fair" and he was getting more air time then the others. so they had to STOP the running of those episodes.
Singdall wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Singdall wrote:
yes and the rules clearly state that ALL candidates get fair and EQUAL time of representation.
Which rules are these? And does Ron Paul know about them? 'Cause he's still in the race.
same rule that prevented several Law and Order TV shows from running due to the actor running for pres. it was "not fair" and he was getting more air time then the others. so they had to STOP the running of those episodes.
To be fair, Arthur Branch would have been an awful president. He's soft, and he's far too political and self-serving. How is that dude gonna deal with terrorism? When confronted with a controversial case, he's always like, "Make a deal, McCoy".
Now Adam Schiff, that motherfUcker is presidential. He doesn't take any Shit. He's old, though. Real old.
To me, the dream ticket would have to be Fin Tutuola and John Munch. Just the right mixture of witty diplomatic finesse and rugged pragmatism. Unfortunately, Munch is a Jew, so that's gonna be problematic.
Recent Visitors: 391
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (391)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Who will Best Awesomize the Debates?
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC